Date:
24.8.87
Time:
Reporter:
-
11.00 11.35 a.m.
MEP/5
1
(1) It is conceded that the Attorney has an arguable
2 case whether in breach of duty of confidence, or breach of fiduciary
3 duty or both.
4
5
(2) The approach adopted by Mr Justice Millett is
6 correct.
7
8
(3) There remains legitimate interest to be protected
9 in Hong Kong, but compared with preserving confidence in the British
10 Security Service, they are not very compelling in terms of restraint.
11
12
(4)
It is difficult to discern what permanent and 13 irreparable damage will be done by prior publication.
14
15
(5) Even if the Defendants are aiders and abetters
16 in breach of a fiduciary duty, they are not parties to an immediate 17 breach of that duty.
18
19
(6) The reasons relied on by the House of Lords have
20 little application in Hong Kong.
21
22
(7) The distinction between publishing extracts and 23 comment on those extracts and the serialisation, is of little moment
24 in the circumstances.
25
26
(8) Freedom of speech buttressed by Article 19 of the
27 Covenant is a powerful factor.
28
29
(9) Hong Kong's perculiar sensitivity and legitimate 30 interest in the workings of Her Majesty's Government are important.
31
32
In the circumstances, I find that the decision of the 33 House of Lords may be distinguished. I have no hesitation in saying 34 that the balance of convenience overwhelmingly comes down in favour 35 of the Defendants. In those circumstances, the Injunction must be
36 discharged.
VERBATIM REPORTERS
HONG KONG
5-8496480 5-497048 5-8496981 5-8932546 5-8122436
023
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.